Státní suverenita a integrace ve vývoji Evropské unie

State Sovereignty and Integration in the Development of the European Union 1. The first purpose of this contribution is thus an attempt at the delineation of this term from the viewpoint of legal dogma, taking into consideration its functions. The second purpose is to find out what objective this legal-political formation is serving. If we define sovereignty as the totality of a number of certain competencies, then we necessarily have to ask ourselves how many of these competencies a state or a member state of the EU needs in each stage of its development. The third purpose of this contribution is the verification and the analysis of the sovereignty of a member state in the context of the integration process of the EU . Finally we will answer a key question regarding the mutual relationship between the sovereignty of the state and integration in the form of a supranational community (the EU ). 2. State sovereignty, as a functional category, describing state power and its exercise, based on laws with limitations, which have been brought on by the development during approximately the last fifty years (supranational delegation, limitations introduced by human rights) is still an inevitable phenomenon, with which the current reality cannot dispense in spite of the “privatization” of law or state. Regardless of whether we use, accept, curse, deny, etc. this concept (state sovereignty) or not. 3. State sovereignty has transformed the volume, contents and methods of all of its component parts in a substantial way, especially as far as internal and external sovereignty is concerned. It is obvious that authority, powers and competencies of the state have significantly decreased. However, its contents have changed as well. Many areas have been privatized; this has reduced the activity of the state namely in the sphere of legislative and executive powers, for the responsibility of the state rests only in the judicial power. A radical reform has been carried out concerning the methods of the exercise of sovereignty. New ways of collaboration, loyalty and dialogue have been added. 4. A functional understanding of sovereignty presupposes the full existence of identification and acceptance, which are the basis of legitimacy. 5. Competence on one hand delineates or limits the sovereignty of a state towards individuals (citizens) and other subjects (and thus turns the term sovereignty into legal sovereignty of the sovereignty of law), on the other hand is it a part of the division of power. The summary of competencies means the contents of sovereignty. Competence is the basic corner stone of sovereignty and thus the measurement tool for its potency. For this, however, it is necessary to precisely quantify the contents of competence and the manner of its execution. This involves a relatively complicated process of measuring, which is underestimated, as competence as a type of execution of power is being assessed only “statically”. Most of all, its execution is not taken into regard, and this also in connection with the execution of other competences. Thus it is necessary to quantify the level of sovereignty on the basis of the measurement of competencies also from the viewpoint of its normativity, the level of precision and accuracy of its limitation and finally of the structure and level of the analysis of the execution of competence. 6. State sovereignty and integration are communicating vessels, although the relationship to changes in the content of sovereignty has not always been direct and the results of such changes are not always accurate in the mathematical sense of the word. The relationship between integration and state sovereignty is based on the delegation of powers onto another entity (even another state), currently onto a supranational one – the EU , which becomes the holder of sovereign rights – sovereignty. 7. The transfer or the relationship is neither straight nor unambiguous. States remain in the position of “masters of the treaty”, although their power (sovereignty) is “filtered”, “disintegrated” by the way that their joint will is being created. 8. The effects of the EU on state sovereignty are multilayered, methodologically developed, multifarious and multiplex; simply very complex. Integration or erosion of state sovereignty happens also “spontaneously”.